Average Portuguese DNA?

[Boudin]

What would the average mainland Portuguese (not Brazilian or islander) 23andMe test look like?

Would it look like this (Oporto) (https://reddit.com/r/23andme/comments/166b6bj/portuguese_what_do_you_think_about_my_results/)?

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=123542&stc=1

[Abaddon]

Not average, he clearly has recent substancial SSA admixture, which is not common on this calculator.

[Friends of Oliver Society]

23andme sucks but sucks less than all the other commercial companies. If you want to base an average for 23andme for an ethnic group you should just group all the 23andme results of that group and do the math or just look for a pattern.


Not average, he clearly has recent substancial SSA admixture, which is not common on this calculator.

How is 1.1% recent SSA ancestry?

[Brás Garcia de Mascarenhas]

They seem quite normal and common. The majority of Portuguese get 97% or more "Portuguese\Spanish" on 23andMe. We are one of the most homogeneous ethnic groups on this platform (the results never differ much from one another).

Here are my and my wife's results for comparison:

https://i.imgur.com/SujrmNK.png

https://i.imgur.com/bR9BBLE.png

[Abaddon]

. How is 1.1% recent SSA ancestry?

Why do you think it isn't?

[Abaddon]

They seem quite normal and common.

I think he is referring to the >1% SSA, thats he asked if its common/average.

[Eurafricanid]

Not average, he clearly has recent substancial SSA admixture, which is not common on this calculator.

I saw a guy in the comments saying he in fully Finnish and has 0.8% Senegambian and guinean, so that's not too far-fetched.

[Boudin]

23andme sucks but sucks less than all the other commercial companies. If you want to base an average for 23andme for an ethnic group you should just group all the 23andme results of that group and do the math or just look for a pattern.

That's exactly what I was trying to do. But almost all the "Portuguese" posts were Brazilian, Madeiran, Azorean, or mixed. So I decided to ask here instead.


I saw a guy in the comments saying he in fully Finnish and has 0.8% Senegambian and guinean, so that's not too far-fetched.

I noticed that too. Apparently he has 0% but his father and grandmother have some.

[Friends of Oliver Society]

Why do you think it isn't?

Math? This is a person who is Portuguese and not a person who is Portuguese and something else that would have introduced the 1% SSA.

Needless to say, all Iberians have a touch of SSA except Basques through the North African contribution.

[Friends of Oliver Society]

Math? This is a person who is Portuguese and not a person who is Portuguese and something else that would have introduced the 1% SSA.

Needless to say, all Iberians have a touch of SSA except Basques through the North African contribution.

btw, 23andme often doesn't show that bit of SSA in Iberians.

[Abaddon]

Needless to say, all Iberians have a touch of SSA except Basques through the North African contribution.

I think you meant "affinity" for "touch", otherwise thats debatable, It quite depends if you interpret the non-eurasian (non-dzudzuana) side of Taforalt as "SSA" instead of ANA.


I saw a guy in the comments saying he in fully Finnish and has 0.8% Senegambian and guinean, so that's not too far-fetched.

I never took comercial "calculators" seriously.


Math? This is a person who is Portuguese and not a person who is Portuguese and something else that would have introduced the 1% SSA

So you believe every portuguese and portuguese descent in this world is black admixed?

[Abaddon]

double

[Eurafricanid]

Math? This is a person who is Portuguese and not a person who is Portuguese and something else that would have introduced the 1% SSA.

Needless to say, all Iberians have a touch of SSA except Basques through the North African contribution.

Not all Iberians, (probably) most (North)Central and (North)Eastern Spanish usually don't have any SSA (except the component that's already inside of Iberomaurusian (Taforalt) by default, around 1/3 of it.)


Target: Morocco_Iberomaurusian
Distance: 25.7265% / 0.25726528
65.6 Israel_Natufian
20.2 Eastern_African
11.0 Western_African
3.2 Ancient_Ancestral_South_Indian


And individually some people straight up don't have any North African whatsoever, like these individuals here:
Target: Spanish_Mallorca:MST073
Distance: 3.6697% / 0.03669674
53.4 Anatolian_Neolithic_Farmer
33.8 Yamnaya_Pastoralist
12.8 Western_Hunter-Gatherer

Target: Spanish_Eivissa:EIV001_2
Distance: 4.2661% / 0.04266079
57.9 Anatolian_Neolithic_Farmer
28.8 Yamnaya_Pastoralist
10.6 Western_Hunter-Gatherer
1.7 Israel_Natufian
1.0 Iranian_Chalcolithic

This one ^^ above is pretty similar to my Euro 1/2, but I do have North African in it.
Target: Eurafricanid-EU
Distance: 2.9907% / 0.02990732
55.6 Anatolian_Neolithic_Farmer
30.8 Yamnaya_Pastoralist
10.7 Western_Hunter-Gatherer
1.7 Israel_Natufian
0.6 Iranian_Chalcolithic
0.6 Morocco_Iberomaurusian

Of couse it's somewhat rare and more common in the east than in the west, where the North African component is bigger.

Usually the ones that have more Iberomaurusian, have more SSA, because the North Africans were always somewhat mixed with SSA.

BTW, North Africans were/are a mix of Iberian + Iberomaurusian + minor SSA, later acquiring the Arab component and more SSA, due to the Trans-Saharan Slave Trade, that's why I usually don't like to model Iberians with complete North Africans populations.

[Friends of Oliver Society]

I think you meant "affinity" for "touch", otherwise thats debatable, It quite depends if you interpret the non-eurasian (non-dzudzuana) side of Taforalt as "SSA" instead of ANA.



I never took comercial "calculators" seriously.



So you believe every portuguese and portuguese descent in this world is black admixed?

Show me a population genetics study that doesn't reveal a touch of SSA in the Portuguese population. It's minuscule but it's there. To pretend it's not is either dishonesty or self delusion.

"But... but... affinity.." wtf is that suppose to mean?
Just accept reality and move on.

[Abaddon]

Show me a population genetics study that doesn't reveal a touch of SSA in the Portuguese population. It's minuscule but it's there. To pretend it's not is either dishonesty or self delusion.

"But... but... affinity.." wtf is that suppose to mean?
Just accept reality and move on.

Hey chick, can you prove im wrong?

But, ok, can you see this image?
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/34/Overview_of_the_genetic_structure_and_global_ances try_inference_in_a_selection_of_European%2C_Near_E astern%2C_and_African_populations.png

Does ALL Iberian samples seems to be SSA admixed according to your eyes?

Another user replied you after me, can you prove he is wrong?

I think you should do what you really understand (can you see your signature?) Lol.

[vader]

OP are you asking about commercial results? Or like research academia results? I got the commercial answer based on the results I've seen. There is variation between results to some extent, but I agree with Brás for the most part full Portuguese get anywhere from 96-100% Iberian on 23andMe and are quite homogeneous from north to south compared to some other populations. However, I can't really recommend AncestryDNA at the moment for us. It is a different animal... my whole family get such varied results it isnt even funny. My dad gets 23% French with the new update, I get senegal % from my mom, whereas my sister, brother, and dad don't. That test is just bad for iberians it seems... used to be better a few updates ago when I was markedly 96% iberian + (4% irish) when I added my portugal and spain %'s up. Now I get 2% swede, 4% irish (has survived for a long time in my results), 2% french... etc. which dont align with my ancestry.

[Boudin]

I'm interested in the percentage of (average) Portuguese DNA that is Sub-Saharan, as well as the percentage of the Portuguese population that has zero Sub-Saharan DNA.

I read in an old encylopedia (from almost a century ago) that the modern Portuguese have, on average, 10% Negro ancestry. That's why I am interested in the true figure.

[Friends of Oliver Society]

Hey chick, can you prove im wrong?

But, ok, can you see this image?
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/34/Overview_of_the_genetic_structure_and_global_ances try_inference_in_a_selection_of_European%2C_Near_E astern%2C_and_African_populations.png

Does ALL Iberian samples seems to be SSA admixed according to your eyes?

Another user replied you after me, can you prove he is wrong?

I think you should do what you really understand (can you see your signature?) Lol.

You're literally retarded. You didn't even understand what that other poster said. I don't have patience for retards anymore. You're not interested in facts and if you were, you're too stupid to understand. You don't even understand what you posted, lolz.

[Friends of Oliver Society]

I'm interested in the percentage of (average) Portuguese DNA that is Sub-Saharan, as well as the percentage of the Portuguese population that has zero Sub-Saharan DNA.

I read in an old encylopedia (from almost a century ago) that the modern Portuguese have, on average, 10% Negro ancestry. That's why I am interested in the true figure.

How would anyone know 100 years ago if the Portuguese have 10% Negro ancestry? Old sources are typically retarded (which people just making up shit as fact). Sometimes I read news articles from the late 19th century and early 20th century and it's so dumb even when you take into account the time period. People just believed absurd nonsense.

I seriously doubt any Portuguese doesn't have a drop of SSA but it's minuscule. How much on average? I don't know but based on general memory it isn't much. However, those from Madeira would have higher.

Why don't you ask the Portuguese posters and the Spanish posters who are from the western part of the peninsula like myself for their results on whatever calculator you choose to get a general idea?

[Friends of Oliver Society]

There you go. You can have a general idea.


Southern Europeans and Middle Eastern populations are known to have inherited a small percentage of their genetic material from recent sub-Saharan African migrations, but there has been no estimate of the exact proportion of this gene flow, or of its date. Here, we apply genomic methods to show that the proportion of African ancestry in many Southern European groups is 1%–3%, in Middle Eastern groups is 4%–15%, and in Jewish groups is 3%–5%. To estimate the dates when the mixture occurred, we develop a novel method that estimates the size of chromosomal segments of distinct ancestry in individuals of mixed ancestry. We verify using computer simulations that the method produces useful estimates of population mixture dates up to 300 generations in the past. By applying the method to West Eurasians, we show that the dates in Southern Europeans are consistent with events during the Roman Empire and subsequent Arab migrations. The dates in the Jewish groups are older, consistent with events in classical or biblical times that may have occurred in the shared history of Jewish populations.https://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1001373

[Petalpusher]

Hey chick, can you prove im wrong?

But, ok, can you see this image?
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/34/Overview_of_the_genetic_structure_and_global_ances try_inference_in_a_selection_of_European%2C_Near_E astern%2C_and_African_populations.png

Does ALL Iberian samples seems to be SSA admixed according to your eyes?

Another user replied you after me, can you prove he is wrong?


It shows exactly that. Wether you consider an arbitrary NA component, yellow sourced on Tunisia (already including some SSA about 15% of it), or plain SSA, purple sourced on Yoruba. Obviously it's not really what happened, Tunisians and Yoruba coming there but it's how admixture works and how this run presents things, it just depends what references are used to model and sometimes it needs caution trying to read into it as it might force things in because there are no better components to use (fe Brits and Utah Germans are not half Basque per say but they are surely half "Basque-like"). Here it however confirms it 2 times for the NA, even 3 times if you use IBD, as long as the plethora of studies demonstrating it. Can't get more sure than that.

Usually it's the North Africans who try to hide the SSA with Iberomaurusian pretending it's not part SSA which is as ridiculous as saying someone fully Amerindian isn't part East Eurasian. "No i score 99.8% Amerindian, so why would i be part East Eurasian?"...completely retarded way of thinking.
For IBM it's actually the contrary, it's not that its been mixed with SSA recently, it's the SSA itself that got "West Eurasianized" due to back migrations over and over through the pleistocene and in more recent times, specially in some era of the upper paleolithic and the Neolithic. Same phenomenon in East Africa but much less Eurasian there than in NA, nobody supposes ancient east African Mota being...100% Mota...isn't part SSA and therefore Somali aren't part SSA because Mota is their local ancestral component.

This is like a 15y old debate that didn't even exist in the first place. Only Basques usually and the surroundings don't have NA, it's for sure little elsewhere in any case and fade to almost nothing as you go more Northeast in Iberia.

[Laly]

So, one can say that the Portuguese are the blackest Europeans?

[Boudin]

How would anyone know 100 years ago if the Portuguese have 10% Negro ancestry? Old sources are typically retarded (which people just making up shit as fact).

In this case they explained their logic; supposedly, 10% of the population at one point were Black slaves, and these mixed with the rest of the population over the next few centuries.


Why don't you ask the Portuguese posters and the Spanish posters who are from the western part of the peninsula like myself for their results on whatever calculator you choose to get a general idea?

You write better English and swear in it more fluently than most native speakers. How?

And of course, how much SSA do you have? If you've taken 23andMe, what percentage of your "DNA Relatives" there have zero SSA?

One last, way more speculative, question: How much SSA would you guess Cortéz and the Conquistadors had?


There you go. You can have a general idea.

Great paper. Here's the more relevant quotes, noting that by "African" they actually mean "Sub-Saharan African":


Application of f4 Ancestry Estimation suggests that the highest proportion of African ancestry in Europe is in Iberia (Portugal 3.2±0.3% and Spain 2.4±0.3%), consistent with inferences based on mitochondrial DNA [6] (https://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1001373#pgen.1001373-Amorim1) and Y chromosomes [7] (https://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1001373#pgen.1001373-Richards1) and the observation by Auton et al. [8] (https://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1001373#pgen.1001373-Auton1) that within Europe, the Southwestern Europeans have the highest haplotype-sharing with Africans. The proportion decreases to the north and we find no evidence for mixture in Russia, Sweden and Scotland


We estimate that the date of sub-Saharan African mixture in Portugal is 45±5 generations and in Spain is 55±3 generations.


Another potential source of some of the African ancestry, especially in Spain and Portugal, is the invasion of Iberia by Moorish armies after 711 AD [35] (https://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1001373#pgen.1001373-Kennedy1), [36] (https://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1001373#pgen.1001373-OCallaghan1). If the Moors already had some African ancestry when they arrived in Southern Europe, and then admixed with Iberians, we would expect the admixture date to be older than the date of the invasion, as we observe.

[Friends of Oliver Society]

In this case they explained their logic; supposedly, 10% of the population at one point were Black slaves, and these mixed with the rest of the population over the next few centuries.

They made the assumption that they mixed. In most cases, slaves would have been men. So who are they going to have sex with?

It was never 10% of the population. It was 10% of the population of a particular city or area, as can be seen here:



In Lisbon and Évora, and throughout much of southern Portugal, slaves comprised roughly 10 percent of the population by the mid-1550s. A comparable scenario existed in parts of southern Spain; 44,000 slaves made up nearly 10 percent of the population of the entire archbishopric of Seville in 1565.
http://ap.gilderlehrman.org/history-by-era/origins-slavery/essays/iberian-roots-transatlantic-slave-trade-1440%E2%80%931640#:~:text=In%20Lisbon%20and%20%C3% 89vora%2C%20and,archbishopric%20of%20Seville%20in% 201565.

Not all of them were SSA. Many were Moorish slaves.


You write better English and swear in it more fluently than most native speakers. How?

Because I was born and raised in the US..

Although there is a poster - a mentally ill Catalan who has been banned a million times - that if you hadn't known, you would have thought was raised in the US (he even uses slang from the 90s). This guy was raised on the internet, and so he sounds like an American. If you're a loser growing up with no friends and spending all your time reading English and interacting with Americans online, then you could fool most Americans as being one of them.


And of course, how much SSA do you have? If you've taken 23andMe, what percentage of your "DNA Relatives" there have zero SSA?

Nothing on 23andme and my relatives typically have nothing or like 1%. 23andme is not good for that. On Dienekes calculator whatever you call it, I have 1.4% SSA, which is roughly typical. I forget what I get in the other calculators but it's basically the same range.

I don't know the percentage of my '23andme relatives' score SSA. It's not something I thought about, and so I can't say. That's stepping into autism territory.


One last, way more speculative, question: How much SSA would you guess Cortéz and the Conquistadors had?

I don't think any different than the typical Spaniard today. The SSA comes from the North African influence. It doesn't come from the Atlantic slave trade. Most SSA slaves in Iberia were men, concentrated in particular areas, such as Seville, of course. I have a book - on Kindle, I think - that is unrelated to the subject of the slave trade but had a breakdown of foreigners in Seville for a census in the 17th century. That may give a percentage of slaves in the city.


Great paper. Here are the more relevant quotes, noting that by "African" they actually mean "Sub-Saharan African":

The language in the last quote is retarded. The last quote says: "Another potential source of some of the African ancestry,... Moorish invasion..." It's not a 'potential source.' It IS the source. It's later acknowledged at the end that SSA from the Moors is what makes logical sense based on the results of the study and so why write 'another potential source' as if it's competing with another possibility? It's bad writing.

[Boudin]

It was never 10% of the population. It was 10% of the population of a particular city or area, as can be seen here:

I too thought they confused demographics of a city with the entire nation.


Nothing on 23andme and my relatives typically have nothing or like 1%. 23andme is not good for that. On Dienekes calculator whatever you call it, I have 1.4% SSA, which is roughly typical. I forget what I get in the other calculators but it's basically the same range.

Right. You did say 23andMe hides some SSA by including it in their definition of "Spanish & Portuguese", which makes sense, since it's older than their 500-year cutoff. But it's also disappointing, since amateur calculators are not precise. I have 0.5% Amerindian on 23andMe but up to 3% on other calculators (I trust the 23andMe measurement more).


I don't know the percentage of my '23andme relatives' score SSA. It's not something I thought about, and so I can't say. That's stepping into autism territory.

Then definitely don't click on this thread. (https://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?364981-Cajun-Statistics-(n-77))

[Abaddon]

So, one can say that the Portuguese are the blackest Europeans?

According to Petalpusher and Grimes, yes, they're blacks.

[Abaddon]

It shows exactly that. Here it however confirms it 2 times for the NA, even 3 times if you use IBD, as long as the plethora of studies demonstrating it. Can't get more sure than that.
It shows exactly what i said to CFG, and now i have two hypotheses:

1 - You are being dishonest and distorting what I said

2 - You simply misunderstood me, I have never denied what is being said about SSA.


Usually it's the North Africans who try to hide the SSA with Iberomaurusian pretending it's not part SSA
Every ancient component hides some other component on it – Eurasian/European or not – not only Taforalt, but you only talk about it, i recommend you to be less biased or obsessed with this stuff, you should also be less rude, since you are not a scientist or some other genetics professional, and never will be, know this, it is my advice that will be useful for you, friend.


which is as ridiculous[...]
This is like a 15y old debate that didn't even exist in the first place.
Are you that sensitive? When you talk about 15y old, you seem to be talking about yourself.

Chill, manchild.

[Abaddon]

There you go. You can have a general idea.

Wow, a 2011 paper, i've expected nothing from you.

[Friends of Oliver Society]

Right. You did say 23andMe hides some SSA by including it in their definition of "Spanish & Portuguese", which makes sense, since it's older than their 500-year cutoff. But it's also disappointing, since amateur calculators are not precise. I have 0.5% Amerindian on 23andMe but up to 3% on other calculators (I trust the 23andMe measurement more).

You're confusing me for someone else. I never said that.

Someone once explained to me a possible reason but I can't remember what they said.



According to Petalpusher and Grimes, yes, they're blacks.

Nope. You're just an insane racist who can't accept the reality that you have a couple of drops of Negro blood in your veins. That's your problem, not mine.


Wow, a 2011 paper, i've expected nothing from you.

It's EVERY sudy that looks for it.

Here is the thing about realty, douche. It doesn't give a fuck what you prefer. You prefer not to be retarded but unfortunately that's the reality.

[Abaddon]

Nope. You're just an insane racist who can't accept the reality that you have a couple of drops of Negro blood in your veins. That's your problem, not mine.

Lets explain my point of view, i dont care if i carry non-european blood or whatever, since other europeans carry either, being black or not.

Can you understand me now, Sean lover?


It's EVERY sudy that looks for it.
Really?
Bycroft et al. says 0,2%, present only in southern Iberia.
Hernandez et al. (2019) says 1.41%±0,72 for southern ones.

Who is the right one among these papers, including the one who you brought to this discussion?

[Abaddon]

You're literally retarded. You didn't even understand what that other poster said. I don't have patience for retards anymore. You're not interested in facts and if you were, you're too stupid to understand. You don't even understand what you posted, lolz.

All of your stuff is based on ad hominem, which is quite normal for a cute neurotypical like you.

[Friends of Oliver Society]

Lets explain my point of view, i dont care if i carry non-european blood or whatever, since other europeans carry either, being black or not.

Can you understand me now, Sean lover?


Really?
Bycroft et al. says 0,2%, present only in southern Iberia.
Hernandez et al. (2019) says 1.41%±0,72 for southern ones.

Who is the right one among these papers, including the one who you brought to this discussion?

Link the studies.


All of your stuff is based on ad hominem, which is quite normal for a cute neurotypical like you.

It's an ad hominem if you insult the person to avoid addressing the argument. An insult is not an ad hominem if you address the argument and also insult the person. And, of course, it's not ad hominem if you insult someone who isn't presenting an argument

[Abaddon]

It's an ad hominem if you insult the person to avoid addressing the argument. An insult is not an ad hominem if you address the argument and also insult the person. And, of course, it's not ad hominem if you insult someone who isn't presenting an argument

So to reinforce dominance in a (virtual) discussion you need insults? Is this your modus operandi? You're a funny dog, i must admit.

Pardon me if i touched a nerve, I didn't expect you and petalpusher to be two cute neurotypicals as emotionally fragile as a teenager, aren't you'all both masters of knowledge and certainty, after all?

But don't feel special about it, there is someone who stands out more than you'all on it (Cristiano Viejo). :laugh:

[Defcon2]

According to Petalpusher and Grimes, yes, they're blacks.

Mulattoes exactly, to a small degree.

I consider myself black because I do not recognize the non-black part.

[gixajo]

Mulattoes exactly, to a small degree.

I consider myself black because I do not recognize the non-black part.

Your 2,5% Black part dominates your 97,5 White part.

[Laly]

According to Petalpusher and Grimes, yes, they're blacks.

How SSA would I be then?

[Abaddon]

How SSA would I be then?

At a mulatto level, take in account that who says it are two PhDs in human genetics and genetic engineering :laugh::laugh::laugh:

[Laly]

At a mulatto level, take in account that who says it are two PhDs in human genetics and genetic engineering :laugh::laugh::laugh:

At what percentage?

And you are Portuguese?

[Abaddon]

At what percentage?
Maybe 50%? Depends of how do you interpret mulatto level percentages.